Monday, October 3, 2011

The Awlaki Sanction: Who's Next on the List?

The links connecting Anwar al-Awlaki to anti-American terrorism
were entirely suppositious, forged through unsubstantiated official assertion. He
was, at most, a clerical
propagandist who never exercised command authority. For that matter, no
evidence has been presented that he ever had an operational role in a military
force of any kind.

Awlaki -- an American-born cleric who was once courted by the Pentagon -- was accused of expressing support for armed attacks
against U.S. military personnel and government interests. It is not terrorism
to employ lethal violence against an invading and occupying army, nor is it a
crime to express support for armed self-defense -- including armed interposition against the aggressive designs of the U.S. government.

The administration asserted
– without providing evidence – that Awlaki had an “operational” role in
planning terrorist
attacks against U.S. citizens. If evidence supporting that charge existed,
the administration had the unconditional constitutional duty to indict Awlaki
and put him on trial.

Intelligence officials knew Awlaki’s location. The
government of Yemen, which is headed by a pliant thug named Ali Abdullah Saleh,
is a wholly owned subsidiary of Washington and would have eagerly cooperated in
an effort to track down and extradite Awlaki. But this would not have validated
the claim – made
by the Bush administration, and embraced by its successor – that the
President of the United States isn’t bound by the Constitution, but rather is the Living Constitution.

As a guarantee of individual liberty, a political
constitution is about as intrinsically valuable as a paper currency. The Constitution and Bill of Rights are irredeemable unless they are backed by a noble metal –
lead, in the form of privately owned ammunition. Nonetheless, and for the
record, this must be said:

There is nothing in the Constitution or laws of the United
States of America that permits a president to order the summary execution of
any human being. Only Congress can declare war. Only a jury can find someone
guilty of a crime. Only a judge can impose a death sentence. Or such would be
the case, were we still living in a constitutional republic, rather than the
militarist empire into which that republic inevitably degenerated.

“In 2007, [then-] CIA director Michael Hayden began
lobbying the White House for `permission to carry out strikes against
houses or cars merely on the basis of behavior that matched a “pattern of life”
associated with al-Qaeda or other groups.’ And next thing you knew, they were
moving from a few attempted targeted assassinations toward a larger air war of annihilation
against types and `behaviors.’”

According
to retired General Wesley Clark, the murder – or, to use his term, “takedown”
-- of Anwar al-Awlaki heralds a “transformation” of the Regime’s strategy in
waging open-ended warfare. Awlaki’s death “makes his final legacy a proof of
the effectiveness of America’s active defense against terrorists,” enthuses Clark.

He goes on to emit one of the purest specimens of totalitarian agitprop ever
recorded:

“For the United States, the journey continues: Awlaki’s
death … moves us closer to the time when we must transition, psychologically
and practically, from being a nation under threat to a nation that once again
champions its openness and welcome to the whole world.”

Mere acceptance of the presidential power to execute anybody
on a whim isn’t sufficient. It must be celebrated openly – nay, it must be extolled
as a selling point to the rest of the world: Come visit this uniquely blessed
land of killer drones and murder by executive decree!

Inspired by Clark’s exhortation, and eager to display my
patriotic zeal to eradicate those who have aided and supported terrorism, I
would like to submit two nominees for the next drone-inflicted counter-terrorist
“takedown”: Retired Generals Wesley Clark and Michael Hayden.

Clark (l.) with KLA chieftain Hashim Thaci (r).

As noted above, there is no evidence that Anwar al-Awlaki
ever actively collaborated in armed violence by Jihadists. Wesley Clark,
however, was the commanding general during the NATO’s 78-day terror bombing of
Serbia.

Hundreds of civilians were murdered in that act of international
terrorism, which resulted in the installation of a criminal syndicate called
the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) as the government of that Serbian province.

The KLA has a remarkable pedigree: It is descended on one side from the
notorious WWII-era Skanderbeg militia organized by the Nazi SS; the other half
of its heritage is Stalinist. It received material and technical assistance
from the CIA , and financial aid from Osama bin Laden -- who were partners in supporting jihadist elements during the wars of Balkan secession.

As CIA director under George W. Bush, Michael Hayden was
deeply involved in recruiting, arming, and supporting a large number of
unreconstructed jihadist, among them an enchanting Somali warlord named Indha
Adde, who now refers to himself as Gen. Yusuf Mohammad Siad.

In an on-the-scene
account, Jeremy Scahill of The Nation
observes that Siad has “pledged allegiance to al-Qaeda” and “openly admits to
having sheltered some of the most notorious Al Qaeda figures—including Fazul
Abdullah Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the 1998 bombings of the US
Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania….”

Stipulating that the term “al-Qaeda” is, in effect,
shorthand for “any group of Muslims Washington has not succeeded in bribing
yet,” the critical point here is that Siad openly admits doing the kinds of things
Awlaki was accused of doing. Hayden and Clark, on the other hand, have committed
crimes well beyond Awlaki’s capacity: As heads of military and intelligence
bureaucracies, they offered material aid and support to terrorists. In fact,
they – and a number of other veterans of the military-intelligence
establishment – continue to do so in retirement.

The MEK was created in 1965 as part of a Soviet-sponsored
international terrorist network that waged wars of "national
liberation" throughout the developing world. Human Rights Watch, which
describes the MEK as an "urban guerrilla group," points out that the
group's ideology is a Muslim variation on "liberation theology."

In his July 7 testimony before the House Committee on ForeignAffairs, Ray Takeyh, who is (of all things) a Senior Fellow at the Council on
Foreign Relations, pointed out that the MEK “sought to … amalgamate Islam and
Marxism. Islam was supposed to provide the values while Marxism offered a
pathway for organizing the society and defeating the forces of capitalism,
imperialism, and feudalism…. [F]rom Lenin they embraced the importance of a
vanguard party committed to mass mobilization, and from Third World revolutionaries
they took the primacy of guerilla warfare as indispensable agents of political
change.”

In 1970, 13 members of the MEK received training (most
likely under Soviet supervision) at PLO camps
in Jordan and Lebanon. Upon their return, the PLO-trained MEK cadres shared
their newly acquired skills with their comrades, and the group embarked on a
wave of attacks and bombings intended to bring down the Shah. During one
rampage, MEK terrorists killed several U.S. military personnel – including Colonel
Lewis Hawkins, the Deputy Chief of Military Mission in Tehran.

Although the group suffered some attrition in its conflict
with the SAVAK, the Shah’s hideous secret police, it survived long enough to
participate in Khomeini revolution. MEK cadres were involved in the seizure of American
hostages in October 1979. But the MEK’s ambitions and ideology made it a poor
fit for Khomeini regime, so the group was purged from the ruling coalition in
1981 and much of its leadership was driven into exile in Iraq. There it was, in
Takeyh’s words, used “as Saddam’s Praetorian Guard.”

Following Saddam’s U.S. supported invasion of Iran, the MEK began a hit-and-run
guerrilla war against the Iranian regime in the hope of triggering a popular
uprising. When that proved unsuccessful, the group set up a political front
group called the National Council of Resistance in Iran (NCRI) in Paris. In
1985, notes Human Rights Watch, the MEK's "leadership was transformed when
Masoud Rajavi announced his marriage to Maryam Uzdanlu.... The husband and wife
team became co-leaders" of the MEK and announced an "ideological
revolution."

Everyday life in Camp Ashraf.

All of the group's members were required to undertake an individual
"ideological revolution" by engaging in Maoist-style
"self-criticism" sessions. Adherents were expected to listen raptly
"to radio messages and explanations provided by [their] commanders"
in order to "gain a deep insight into the greatness of our new leadership,
meaning the leadership of Masoud and Maryam.... To believe in them as well as
to show ideological and revolutionary obedience to them."

By 1987, the MEK had acquired "all the main attributes
of a cult," writes Iranian scholar Ervand Abrahamian, with Masoud Rajavi
claiming the titles Rahbar (leader) and Imam-i hal (the Present Imam), and the
forerunner to the impending second advent of the Mahdi. In 1994, the House
Foreign Relations Committee described the group as a violent,
Marxist-influenced cult. The Committee Chairman at the time was Congressman Lee
Hamilton (D-Indiana), who is now on the group’s payroll.

“Friendships and all emotional relationships are forbidden” to those recruited
into the MEK, writes Elizabeth Rubin of the New
York Times magazine, who has spent time at the group’s headquarters at Camp Ashraf, 40 miles north of Baghdad. “From the time they are toddlers, boys and
girls are not allowed to speak to each other. Each day at Camp Ashraf you had
to report your dreams and thoughts.” Maoist “struggle sessions” and severe
punishment for “deviationism” are commonplace.

Expelled from France in 1986, Masoud Rajavi was welcomed in
Baghdad, where he and his followers built a "National
Liberation Army" that joined the Iran-Iraq war on Saddam's
side. The MEK's plan was to recruit a huge army of suicide commandos whose
sacrifice would inspire the “liberation” of Iran.

“We will not be fighting alone; we will have the people on
our side,” proclaimed Rajavi. “They are tired of this regime, and ... they have
every incentive to get rid of it forever. We will only have to act as their
shields, protecting them from being easy targets for the [revolutionary]
guards. Wherever we go there will be masses of citizens joining us, and the
prisoners we liberate from jails will help us lead them towards victory. It
will be like an avalanche, growing as it progresses.”

When the war ended in 1988 without victory for Iraq or the
"National Liberation Army," the MEK leadership imposed yet another
"ideological revolution" on its followers, this one including compelled
mass divorces and widespread torture of those suspected of espionage or ideological
deviation. Following the first Gulf War, the MEK collaborated in Saddam's
crackdown on Shi'ites and Kurds.

In its campaign to build support for the invasion of Iraq, the Bush
administration mentioned MEK camps in Iraq as evidence of Saddam’s support for
international terrorism. Following the invasion, U.S. forces disarmed MEK
fighters who operated several camps within 60 miles of the Iranian border.
Rather than treating them as terrorists, the Bush administration designated the
MEK fighters as "protected" persons under the Geneva
Convention.

In fact, the Bush administration was so intent on sheltering
the MEK – which, recall had killed Americans and taken part in the seizure of
American hostages – that it rebuffed an offer from Iran to exchange MEK leaders
for al-Qaeda suspects being held in Tehran. In exchange for protection, the MEK
began to produce a series of lurid – and entirely fabricated – “intelligence”
reports regarding Iran’s nuclear program.

The MEK has no support among reform-minded Iranians; in fact, the group is immensely useful to the incumbent regime as a way of discrediting its opposition, which in official propaganda is depicted as allies of the bizarre Islamo-Leninist cult. The current Iranian government is awful; if it were to seize power, the MEK -- which is the Persian equivalent of the Khmer Rouge -- would be dramatically worse.

Clark, Hayden, and the MEK's other American courtesans are members of the American nomenklatura, which means that they are on the "who" side of Lenin's "who does what to whom" formula. The murder of Anwar al-Awlaki was intended as an object lesson to those of us on the other side of that dichotomy, demonstrating what can and will be done to anyone who is identified by the Regime as what the Soviets used to call a "socially dangerous person."

An Update, and an Urgent Appeal

"For the second time this year, Americans can celebrate the elimination of another enemy of the state," proclaims columnist Mark Paredes in Utah's Deseret News. No, seriously -- he really wrote those words. See the blog at LewRockwell.com for my reaction to that Stalinoid screed.

During the past couple of months, I've been doing some editorial work and writing for Republic magazine (and some related properties); this explains why my output here at Pro Libertate has declined during that period. This is very much a full-time job -- but, in all candor, it pays next to nothing, which is pretty typical of activist-oriented publications. It is the first regular paying work I've had since getting thrown under the bus by TNA five years ago today, and I'm certainly grateful for it -- but it's not enough to support a family of eight.

I recognize that there is nothing unique about our predicament, and that many of you are in similar straits. I would be deeply and abidingly grateful for any help you can provide.

Thanks so much for your help in keeping Pro Libertate on-line! God bless.

15 comments:

Will, you've covered all the bases with this one and I agree completely. The sad thing is should you have the misfortune of reading through the numerous pig troughs of American public opinion you'd find an incredible number of knee-jerk robots who are more than happy to see someone die "just because". They haven't a clue, and don't seem to give a damn, that in their collectivist hearts they're actually "happy" to sell their birthright for a bowl of fetid federal porridge. No thinking involved. And to further these dolts along are the drum beating propagandists of the major media. Have a thought otherwise? "U mest b a terrist lovin rag 'ed or sumpthin! USA USA USA!!!" Idiocy reigns within their noggins. What this event lays is a foundation for what will come home to roost. It is the opening volley for operations and drones to patrol our own skies. They've already floated articles within the UK and here about this and how local police departments are already testing the waters for these sorts of devices. That's happening today. And to think people actually worry about someone trying to get INTO this country when the day will come they can't get OUT because an eye in the sky spots their heat signature. Terrorist? Clearly anyone "loitering" outside of their permitted assembly zones must be the enemy, or so says the drones algorithm, so "KaBlammm!!" out go your lights compadre. Who needs a fence on the ground, that being so "yesterday", when you can have a killer fence in the sky. Yemen may be on the other side of the globe but it may as well be right next door.

Awful as it might be to say it, I find myself now looking forward to the day when numerous flag-waving, warmongering Amoricon sheepletards find themselves as the "whom" and on the wrong end of a regime drone attack.

I'd rather they repent. Even Nineveh repented for a while after Jonah's exhortations. Of course, he was telling them God was going to destroy them in 3 days if they didn't. They weren't believers in Yahweh at that time, but repented anyway. Who here thinks our contemporaries who DO claim to believe in Yahweh will repent? I surely wouldn't put my money on it.

What crime attributed to Nineveh thousands of years ago isn't an institutionalized, tax-supported policy in this country today?

The US now has an assasination process that is devoid of any constitutional authority or judicial process. Whoever is authorizing this,is preparing the US population to accept this process being used inside the USA.The Patriot Act now allows Federal agencies to tap your phone, intercept your mail, surreptitiously enter/search your home, incarcerate you incommunicado and never charge you, or allow you to have an attorney. With Janet Napolitano's "See Something, Say Something" we now have arrived at the Polizei Police state of communist East Germany.

Sorry, Linda- no one in this country would believe God, let alone a prophet or angel sent as emmisary from him. We're that decadent, IMO.But the question is asked in the header: 'Who's next?'Will, we all know the 'next' person on the list is a Patriot. It may be you, or Mo, Linda, myself, or any other person you can find who's not swallowing the koolaide swill purveyed by the dotgov. There really is no further proof needed than Jose Guerena, who you will remember well.Jim

The technology that is already available right now is staggering. From 30,000 feet - invisible to anyone on the ground - cameras can recognize the faces of their targets, compare them with photos using facial recognition software, and identify them to someone sitting at a video console on the other side of the world. The person who pushed the button that killed Anwar al-Awlaki was probably sitting in Nevada, and the video feed was probably being simultaneously watched in the Pentagon and the White House. Big Brother can truly watch you - anywhere in the world. And can snuff out your life at will. There is nowhere to hide.

My contact in the CIA says the ID badges worn by everyone in the Pentagon and all the other offices of the security state are recorded by sensors in the doorways and walls, and saved automatically in a database. Anytime they wish, they can query the computer and determine the movements of any individual, moment by moment, for any time period they wish. Not wearing the badge, which can be detected and alarms raised by cameras in the halls, can get you arrested at once.

Soon, the day will come when all children will be implanted with RFID chips, supposedly to prevent abduction. In reality, all our movements, and those of every person we meet with, will be retrievable from a database.

The power of computer storage doubles every year. Soon it will be practically infinite.

Police are already cruising parking lots with cameras rolling. They no longer have to punch license plates into their computers. The computers to which the cameras feed their data will instantly detect the plate of any scofflaw, and beep an alarm.

How long before the cameras are connected to facial recognition databases, loaded up with driver's license photos, which will detect any face in a crowd, or walking down the street, who has not filed a tax return, or who has in some way displeased the State?

It has been the lesson of history, from the time of the invention of the longbow, to the gun, to the airplane, that any technological advance is used to wage war and to commit murder. Feudal lords, barons, popes, presidents and prime ministers have never hesitated to use these devices against any citizen who threatens their hold on power. Why should pilotless drones be any different?

As others have observed, the time will inevitably arrive when our government will use these drones against us. They are already using them along our border with Mexico. Soon they will circle above our cities, watching for large groups of people gathering, and photographing their faces. It is just a step further to fire a missile at them "before they can become violent."

I am grateful that I am old enough that I hopefully may not survive to live under such a regime. But I weep for your children, as I have none of my own.

You have catalogued a long history of atrocities and horrors by the MEK, which is so beloved of our Establishment. It is violently Communist, rabidly Marxist, has murdered Americans, was allied with "The Vile Saddam Hussein" and supported by him, received training at PLO camps, and committed bombings and terrorism against the Shah, an American ally. (One of the most dangerous positions in the world to be in.) It has all the mind-control hallmarks of a dangerous and violent pseudo-Islamic cult.

In spite of all this, MEK is courted and supported by the powerful and righteous in America. How can this be?

Let me suggest an answer. In all this catalog of sin which you have listed in your article, they have never committed the one and only sin that matters to our Government. All else, every atrocity, every crime, every crazed belief antagonistic to our freedoms, can be forgiven of a terrorist group by America, except this one act: They have never killed an Israeli, or any other Jew.

Think about that.

- Lemuel Gulliver.

PPS: Come to think of it, neither did the Kosovo Liberation Army, of which Mr. Wesley "The Harlot" Clark is so fond, or the Irish Republican Army, the old bosom pals of Mr. Peter "The Pimp" King, our present chief crusader against "Islamo-Fascism." Before your readers (especially the Anonymous Lurker,) accuse me of bigotry against those of the Talmudic persuasion, I ask again: Think about that. - LG

PPPS: To lighten the mood... Question: Why do Jews have long noses? Answer: Air is free!Question: Why did G-d create Goyim? Answer: SOMEONE got to pay retail, nein? Question: How was the Grand Canyon created? Answer: Izzy Rosenfeld dropped a quarter down a gopher hole.

(PPPPS: Those were told to me by a Jewish friend. They are a pretty self-aware and self-mocking race, to their great credit.)

With all this violence directed at God's creation we must consider our demise - Yes, it's quite possible we may all end up as targets of His enemy. The hope I get from this is that I would be considered worthy of martyrdom (although, I must painfully admit, I don't necessarily relish the idea). On the other end,is that the author of all Conspiracy has already been defeated, and though he and his minions have constructed yet another Tower of Babel, it too, will be destroyed

there are many good words here from everyone, but there's one more word to add to this conversation. i've thought about it for a bit, and i've decided that it wouldn't be merely inflammatory rhetoric to say it.